Showing posts with label Confederation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Confederation. Show all posts

24 February 2020

On the need for politics #nlpoli

Politics [is] the art of pursuing common interests through... active listening, advocacy, public persuasion, compromise and negotiation.

William Ford Coaker,
the father of the Commission
The people from Newfoundland and Labrador quoted in the Globe and Mail on Friday described the problem facing the province today.

We are not talking about chronic overspending, an aging population that will need more health care, or the impact of Muskrat Falls.

The problem is the shared attitude among the province’s opinion leaders  - the ones quoted by the Globe and many more besides - that *any* solutions to the province's financial problems are bleak and politically unacceptable.

Here are the bits from the Globe and Mail piece, ironically by some guy named Greg Mercer, a name he shares with the current Premier’s chief of staff:
  • Political science professor Amanda Bittner: “You’re going to be making some tough choices that nobody is going to be happy with, and it’s probably going to be miserable.”
  • Lawyer and cable television show host Melissa Royle Critch described the problems as “daunting” and said the debt problem was “insurmountable.”
  • Progressive Conservative leader Ches Crosbie: “We are in a death spiral.”
  • Outgoing Premier Dwight Ball said that borrowing to cover continued deficits will be the major challenge facing his successor.
  • Economics professor Scott Lynch said,” [Dealing with the financial problem is] going to be a nasty situation. These cuts will be extremely painful.”
We can add to that finance minister Tom Osborne who recently dismissed out of hand a proposal to put the government’s liquor corporation in the private sector, like Alberta did more than 20 years ago.  The result would create jobs,  preserve provincial tax revenues, and bring in a couple of billion dollars in the sale.

But Osborne, like all the others leading the province will brook no change in anything.

They simply want someone else to pay the bills.

01 April 2019

Gaslighting a society #nlpoli

Saturday morning and Facebook delivered a video clip of Peter Mansbridge accepting a lifetime achievement award.

After the obligatory thanks to everyone, Mansbridge delivers a scripted couple of minutes about journalism in the age of fake news and alternate facts.

"Journalism is under threat," Mansbridge warned, "in a way we haven't witnessed before."

"The very principle that we stand for is under attack."

"Truth is under attack."

Finding truth and presenting truth is important, according to Mansbridge.

Challenging power and those who wield it is important for "power unchallenged too often becomes power abused."

25 September 2015

The N-word #nlpoli

New Democratic Party leader Tom Mulcair likely never imagined that an insult he threw at a couple of Parti Quebecois politicians in the Quebec National Assembly 20 years ago would come back to haunt him 2015.

Liberal candidate Nick Whalen likely never imagined that reminding Mulcair of the word he used – “Newfie” -  would rob Mulcair of whatever coverage he’d hoped to get out of his campaign stop in St. John’s.

But it did. 

Then the controversy over Mulcair’s remarks carried on for another two days as New Democrats whined and complained  about the whole issue.  That only served to keep it going.

And to make sure the story didn’t die,  two national pieces  - Colby Cosh (National Post) and Evan Dyer (CBC) – weighed in.  Cosh and Dyer picked up on the context of the original comment and that’s where things stared to get really interesting.

01 April 2013

Federalism and the Newfoundlanders: 64th birthday edition #nlpoli

April 1, 2013 marks the 64th anniversary of Newfoundland’s confederation with Canada.

Here are a few older posts on the subject that stand the test of time:

-srbp-

25 February 2013

Copper-fastened #nlpoli

According to the Telegram editorialist argued last week, this fuss over renovations was nothing at all.
At any rate, renovations planned long in advance — to keep the legislature from falling apart — are hardly a fair target for criticism.
It’s fair to say if the Opposition’s roof was leaking, they’d be singing a different tune.
This conclusions assume one thing not actually disclosed in media reports on the need to relocate three floors of the Confederation Building tower and another thing that’s actually preposterous.

28 November 2012

Save yourself a bundle #nlpoli

A couple of decades ago, Greg Malone made a living lampooning an actor who decided to get into politics.

Now the actor and comedian has decided to try his hand at history writing.

No small irony.

There is not a single thing – not a single, solitary, living thing – in Greg Malone’s book on the supposed Confederation conspiracy that professional Jeff Webb didn’t write about  - and dismiss - already.

For those who may have missed the post and links from last April on Malone’s book, here’s the link to Webb’s piece

Save yourself a bundle.

-srbp-

16 April 2012

Our Secret Nation #nlpoli

Comedian Greg Malone is writing a book.

The title is Don’t tell the Newfoundlanders:  the true story of Newfoundland’s Confederation with Canada.

It is non-fiction.

Well, supposedly it is non-fiction.

That’s because any book or article with the “true story” in the title is pretty much guaranteed to be full of plenty of popular myths, fairy tales, folklore and just plain old bullshit.

The likelihood of getting the untrue story from any “true story”  goes off the dial when the book is about Confederation.  You see, since 1949, Newfoundland has had a thriving conspiracy industry centred on Confederation.  It rivals any of the grassy knoll, Area 51 stuff in the United States on any level.

And when you dig a little deeper you know you are going to get the real story that is as authentic as you might expect from an ersatz Barbara Frum. 

Last year, Mary Walsh interviewed Greg about his book when she filled in at The Current.  That’s a link to the audio and appropriately enough Greg follows on a discussion of humour in politics.  The blurb describes Greg’s book this way:

And he has uncovered what he says was a conspiracy to make sure Newfoundlanders did join Canada.

Yes, friends.

It is the same old schtick. 

Such old schtick, in fact, that historian Jeff Webb has already dealt with it. Such old schtick, in fact, someone made a movie out of it.

And it really is the same… old… schtick.  Malone credits the late Jim Halley as one of his inspirations for digging into Confederation.  With that starting point, you can be pretty much assured of what is coming. 

Malone doesn’t disappoint on that front.  Malone talks With Walsh about some Canadians lusting after iron ore and hydro-electricity in Labrador, the British/Canadian war debt written off against Confederation and all the rest of the stories that have been swirling around since the late 1940s.

There doesn’t look to be a fact, detail or argument from Malone you can’t find somewhere else.  And, inevitably, there are likely plenty of details Malone just never considered because they didn’t fit into his world view.

Apparently, the book is set for a Christmas release

- srbp -

Related:

01 April 2010

Happy Confederation Day!

Closing the deal december 1948

Signing of the Terms of Union between Newfoundland and Canada, December 1948.

The union took effect shortly before midnight on March 31, 1949 but events marking the occasion took place on April 1, the start of the new fiscal year.

For a worthwhile perspective, one first generation Canada – your humble e-scribbler – will recommend the words of another first generation Canadian at nottawa along with some thoughts offered from this corner last year on the 60th anniversary of Confederation:

“As we mark this 60th anniversary of Confederation, it is worth considering the extent to which current government policies fail to continue those changes.  It is worth noting that in the endless wars with outsiders, there has been a steady rebuilding of the walls and barriers we have worked so hard to tear down.  We worked to tear them down because they served only to restrict us.

It is worth noting that genuine pride, innovation and self-reliance can be stifled by a late-night telephone call and by the relentless personal attacks that come from merely dissenting from official views. By choking off healthy debate about public policy issues within Newfoundland and Labrador, by strangling any alternative views we serve only to return this place to self-defeating isolation.

Confederation gave Newfoundlanders and Labradorians the tools and opportunities to make for themselves a better place in the world. In 1949, we became once more masters of our own destiny and masters of our own house.

On this 60th anniversary of Confederation, we must be mindful of how far we have come and at the same time, be aware that if we are to continue to grow and prosper we must safeguard the foundation on which our current prosperity is built.”

-srbp-

03 April 2009

Confederation 60: the panel discussion

If you weren’t at the Confederation panel discussion on Wednesday night you’re bound to have no idea what actually happened.

But if you were there you wound up as part of a great two hour discussion of a current issue that thankfully avoided turning into another edition of Radio Free Spindy.

The political science department at Memorial University organized a panel discussion on Confederation titled Terms of (Dis)union: Confederation 60 years on.

The panel comprised Terry Bishop-Stirling and Jeff Webb from the history department, political scientist Christopher Dunn, Jim Feehan from the economics department and Russell Wangersky from The Telegram.  Moderator for the evening was Doug Letto. After some opening remarks and a series of questions put to the panel by Letto, the moderator opened the floor for what proved to be where the real meat for the evening appeared.

The telegram coverage gives only a tiny portion of it, incidentally, and it isn’t online.  It also gets the vote count wrong.  The majority of hands opted for Confederation but the difference wasn’t overwhelming.  That’s what prompted panellist Terry Bishop-Stirling to comment that the result was pretty much what happened 60 years ago.

When asked about what was needed to change things from this point onward, there was an apparent consensus on the panel about the need for greater awareness of provincial issues among people across the country.  That thread wound through the night on one way or another.

On the surface that seems like a good idea and certainly the obsession in some quarters with what is written about the province in the Globe and Mail reflects that view.

But is there really a need for people in Saskatchewan or even Nova Scotia to be familiar with Newfoundland and Labrador history and issues on most of the things that dominate provincial politics here?  While it’s a wonderful Katimavik/national unity kind of idea, typically most of us do not bother with issues that are of a local and private nature somewhere else.

All the issues of economic development are the ones that get people agitated the most but they are also entirely under provincial jurisdiction. While people not from here ask the sorts of questions some of the panellists mentioned - and we've all had them – their inquisitiveness might be taken less as a sign of their ignorance and more as a normal curiosity at why that crowd down there are on our TVs again ranting about something.

In other words, it's not just a matter of why they don't know as much as a question of should they know or do they need to know in the first place.

Economist Jim Feehan repeated several times the idea that the history of Newfoundland and Labrador is a struggle for control of natural resources.  That’s certainly one view but provincial political control, which is what he seemed to be talking about, was sorted out in 1949 and reinforced in 1985.  At that point of realization, it gets a bit hard to figure out what value there would be in educating people in the lower mainland of British Columbia about Churchill Falls.

Heck, most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians aren’t up to speed on that except as myth.  That goes to perhaps the most incisive point made during the night by one of the audience members.

What may be needed came out of another part of the discussion, namely the need for a wide, local and public debate about local political priorities. That’s something which has been absent for the past five or six years. if that sort of thing were to take place maybe we could realise we are already masters of our own house. 

We just have to start acting like it.

-srbp-

31 March 2009

Confederation 60: Federalism and the Newfoundlanders

The 60th anniversary of Confederation in 1949 is gaining a fair bit of attention but not nearly as much as it should.

The noisy minority

The one feature of the reporting and commentary seems to be the list of grievances, complaints and problems.  Now to be sure, this comes from a relatively small group of people to be found largely in St. John’s. They are the progeny of the crowd who, for their own reasons, have never gotten over losing the two referenda in 1948 that led to Confederation.

For the past 60 years this relatively small band has thrived on the belief that the whole thing was a plot and that all the ills of Newfoundland and Labrador can be placed squarely at the feet of “Canadians” and Confederation. They have thrived on the belief but not on the fact of the matters, and that is definitely not from lack of trying. 

There are three other reasons why they are such a small number, however, than the fact that they haven’t turned up evidence to back their claims.  There is a reason why the majority of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians do not give any support to their pseudo-separatist cause.

First, theirs is a negative message.  Not only does it claim this place is a mess, a claim that is hard to sustain for any length of time, it places blame for the mess squarely at the feet of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians for being too stunned – in the local meaning of the word – to look after their own affairs.

You’ll find no less an authority than Mary Walsh delivering just such a judgement in Hard rock and water, a fantasy film a few years ago that compared Newfoundland and Iceland. Most of the crowd that flocked to the showings of the film in St. John’s likely didn’t hear that part but it’s there if you listen. This is not to say Walsh is one of that small band, but her judgment is the logical conclusion one must come to from listening to the litany of grievances.

You’ll see the same thing in comments by the current Premier delivered in jest admittedly to a crowd of writers for Macleans back in 2004. The transcript is online, but here’s a synopsis from that first link along with the facetious view of the whole interview:

Understand that the editor’s question came after the Premier volunteered the opinion that the House of Assembly was “unproductive” and joked that if he had his way he would probably never call it in session. D’oh! That question came after the Macleans crowd asked the Premier why the provincial deficit was so big. His response was mismanagement over the past 10 years. There was a lengthy bit about the Stunnel; two sentences on the fishery. D’oh! The last question had the Premier calling for a seal cull. D’oh! The Premier made some misstatements of fact, for good measure (D’oh!) and a couple of big ideas got a handful of words, without explanation. D’oh! Take the whole interview and you have a bunch of poor, laughing drunks, complaining about having no money, who apparently can’t manage their own affairs, and yet who want to build grandiose megaprojects and kill seals.

There is a corollary to this that is worth mentioning in passing.  The story they tell is of a hard-done-by crowd victimised by the outside world and constantly needing a hand-out. it’s a cliche, of course, and one that they rightly find insulting but it is the essence of the story they tell.

Secondly, their message is almost invariably nothing more than a photocopy of something from somewhere else.  Masters of our own house, the constant airing of grievances, the list of demands, and the idea of getting into Confederation are all ideas advanced by the nationalist/separatist movement in Quebec. They are nothing more than a variation on the hand-me-down political ideas of copying the Irish or Icelandic models.  They don’t resonate with people who have a substantively different understanding of the world than Quebeckers, Icelanders or the Irish.

Thirdly, and flowing from that, their message has no vision for the future, no substantive way of correcting the pattern of behaviour they claim is responsible for the mess.  They do not speak to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador about their future in a way that people can actually relate to.

The time before Confederation is within the memory of people living today.  Even those of us first generation Canadians can recall how far we have come since the 1960s but except for those inculcated with what John Crosbie once called townie bullshit talk, our experience of the world is not driven by innate insecurity and feelings of inadequacy, individually or collectively.

And what’s more, the second generation Canadians now in adulthood do not recall the days of self-imposed insecurity.  Theirs is a world where it is perfectly natural for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to be judged on their own individual merits. They are able to go anywhere in the world and succeed and, with few exceptions, they do.  Theirs is a world much larger than what can be seen from the nearest headland.  The revolution between the ears of the people of this place happened a long while ago.

The rolling of thunder

Confederation came quietly in 1949 but the reverberations from it continue to shake Newfoundland and Labrador.

The most obvious change after April 1, 1949 that most people saw was a change in their individual financial standing.  Not only did Canadian social welfare programs start to flow, but prices dropped throughout the former country as protectionist tariffs disappeared. Traveling to Canada no longer required a passport and leaving Newfoundland to work on the mainland no longer meant traveling to a foreign land. The walls that had once served to hold Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in came down immediately.

With Confederation, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians found a financial prosperity they had not known before but they also found a financial security. Economic problems in a town or industry no longer had to mean local disaster and the permanent departure of local residents.

Before Confederation, a community like Stephenville would have assuredly faced disaster. The provincial government, as it turned out, did not need to lift a finger and indeed its meagre efforts to respond to the closure did not spell doom for the community.  Residents who used to work at the paper mill found work easily elsewhere in Canada and could continue to live in their homes. It may not be ideal and indeed we may take it for granted but the experience in Stephenville in 2005 stands in stark contrast to the experience of communities in Newfoundland in the century and more beforehand.

The Newfoundland and Labrador government also benefitted as well from the strategic financial depth provided by Confederation.  Government had the room to explore and to make mistakes in economic development – like the chocolate factories and rubber boot plants and cucumber hothouses – without the fear such mistakes would translate almost instantly into suffering for ordinary Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. 

Confederation gave the provincial government a wealth of cash in addition to its own modest surplus from the Commission.  Schools, roads and hospitals came as a direct consequence.

The most profound change that came with Confederation, though, was the restoration throughout Newfoundland and Labrador of responsible government. That one change gave individuals in the province – Labradorians for the first time ever – the direct responsibility to elect the people who would represent them not only in the provincial legislature but in the national parliament as well.  No longer confined to dealing with only local affairs or with issues directly related to Newfoundland and Labrador, the people of the province could have a hand in shaping the policies of a country with much wider influence globally and much wider responsibilities than they had known before.

The path ahead

Newfoundland and Labrador today enjoys a measure of individual and collective prosperity earlier generations could only dream of. All is not perfect, but it is immeasurably better than it might have been.

It is immeasurably better because we have – individually and collectively – been able to apply ourselves to making it better.  We have made mistakes and learned from them and we have also enjoyed great success.  The current prosperity comes entirely from policies followed by successive governments in the 1980s and 1990s that are denigrated as give-aways only by the ignorant or the self-interested.

The broader foundation of economic success grew out of policies which took advantage of the move toward a global economy and free trade. The 1992 Strategic Economic Plan, which remains in place to a great extent, grew out of the ideas of two projects of public consultation, one in the 1980s and the other to develop the plan itself.  These were meaningful consultations in which many people had a direct impact on what the final documents said.

As we mark this anniversary it is worth considering the three fundamental changes needed to implement the 1992 SEP.  Those three changes are important because they are fundamentally related to the changes that began in 1949:

  • A change within people. There is a need for a renewed sense of pride, self-reliance and entrepreneurship. We must be outward-looking, enterprising and innovative, and to help bring about this change in attitude we will have to be better educated. During the consultation process, most people agreed that education is essential to our economic development.
  • A change within governments. Governments (both politicians and the bureaucracy) must focus on long-term economic development and planning, while still responding to short-term problems and needs. Government programs and services must place a greater emphasis on the quality of the services provided and on the client. Changes in education, taxation and income security systems are also considered critical to our economic development.
  • A change in relationships. To facilitate the necessary changes in the economy, new partnerships must be formed among governments, business, labour, academia and community groups. In particular, better co-ordination between the federal and provincial governments in the delivery of business and economic development programs is needed to eliminate duplication and to prevent confusion for those who use them.

As we mark this 60th anniversary of Confederation, it is worth considering the extent to which current government policies fail to continue those changes.  It is worth noting that in the endless wars with outsiders, there has been a steady rebuilding of the walls and barriers we have worked so hard to tear down.  We worked to tear them down because they served only to restrict us.

It is worth noting that genuine pride, innovation and self-reliance can be stifled by a late-night telephone call and by the relentless personal attacks that come from merely dissenting from official views. By choking off healthy debate about public policy issues within Newfoundland and Labrador, by strangling any alternative views we serve only to return this place to self-defeating isolation.

Confederation gave Newfoundlanders and Labradorians the tools and opportunities to make for themselves a better place in the world. In 1949, we became once more masters of our own destiny and masters of our own house.

On this 60th anniversary of Confederation, we must be mindful of how far we have come and at the same time, be aware that if we are to continue to grow and prosper we must safeguard the foundation on which our current prosperity is built.

-srbp-

Confederation 60: Statement by the Leader of the Opposition

Even as we sit here today, the bells of Parliament Hill in Ottawa are chiming the Ode to Newfoundland over the National Capital Region in celebration of the sixtieth anniversary of the Confederation of this Province with the nation of Canada.

In the 500-plus years of our history as a people, Confederation represents one of the greatest milestones that we have achieved in our Province, a union fostered by former Premier Joseph R. Smallwood, a founding father of Confederation who championed the cause as one of the greatest orators this country has ever seen or heard.

Since Confederation, we have seen greater prosperity for the people of our Province than ever before. I do not need to go through the entire list. They are already familiar to us: social supports for families and individuals, such as the baby bonus; income support and old age pension benefits; institutions of higher learning across the Province, such as Memorial University, trades colleges, and the Marine Institute; economic opportunities for our people, both here at home and across Canada as we industrialize through the development of hydro resources and iron ore mining, and further development of the pulp and paper industry; transportation links within our own Province, through the completion of the Trans-Canada Highway on the Island portion.

These improvements to our lives are very obvious to those who recall life in Newfoundland and Labrador before Confederation. But, Mr. Speaker, Confederation was not all about our wallets and what we can get out of it for ourselves. Confederation was also about what we brought to Canada: a proud people ready to contribute and to take our place within the larger Canadian federation.

In sixty short years, there is no doubt that this Province has left a mark on Canada, just as Canada has left a mark on Newfoundland and Labrador, and we can never forget the brave people of this Province who have fought and died fighting for freedom under the flag of Canada, just as their forefathers fought for freedom under the Union Jack.

My district in Labrador has particular attachment to Confederation, and voted overwhelmingly in its favour. Those referendums were the first time that the people of Labrador were permitted the right to vote during more than a century of Responsible Government in Newfoundland. For the first time, the people of Labrador felt that their opinions were valued, that they felt included which is why today they have a strong attachment and pride in our union with Canada.

Confederation is like a marriage: no doubt there are occasional spats and fights, we might take each other for granted from time to time and we have periods of not speaking to each other. But, just like a marriage, the relationship is based on lasting mutual respect for each others positions.

On this sixtieth anniversary, as the bells of Ottawa ring, I think all the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and the people of Canada, should take a moment to reflect on how fortunate we are to live in a nation with publicly funded social programs, a country known the world over for champion freedoms and equality for all peoples and a country that promotes peace around the world.

-srbp-

Confederation 60: Todd Russell’s statement in the Commons

Mr. Speaker, 60 years ago today just before midnight, Canada gained its tenth province and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador became Canadian citizens.

Today is the anniversary of our Confederation with Canada. The past six decades have brought great change. There have been ups and downs. But on balance, we are richer for being part of Canada and Canada is richer for our presence.

In my riding of Labrador the decision was clear. Voting in 1948 for only the third time in our history, my ancestors achieved a long- held dream. With 80% support, we chose Canada, and we still do.

March 31, 1949, gave new meaning to our country's motto: A mari usque ad mare, “From Sea to Sea”.

When the day breaks over Canada, it breaks a little earlier than it did on July 1, 1867, and we are all better because of it.

On this date we became part of this great country, this united country, the best country in the world.

On this date, Canada became complete.

Vive le Canada!

-srbp-

Confederation irksome: CP coverage

From pseudo-separatist actor Greg Malone as told to Canadian Press:

"It's [Confederation’s] a total failure," Malone says.

"I think we need to be prepared to separate as much as Quebec is. I think we need to be that strong ourselves."

On the basis of what Greg evidently knows about Quebec, that would mean Confederation has been an overwhelming success for Newfoundland and Labrador.

And here’s another thing:  if he hadn’t already achieved some notoriety as a comedian would anybody be giving him the time of day, least of all Canadian Press?

For the fact checker:

Like Canada, the Dominion of Newfoundland had functioned much like its own country, with its own currency and passports. But tough economic times in 1934 forced the Newfoundland government to let a British-appointed commission oversee the region until the economy improved.

“Much like” suggests that Newfoundland really wasn’t “its own country”.  Before February 1934, Newfoundland was a Dominion like the others.

The tough economic times didn’t bring about the collapse of self-government in 1934.  Bankruptcy brought on by a decade and more of political mismanagement led to the surrender of self-government.

-srbp-

Confederation 60: old stuff

1.  An old nottawa post that still rings true.

2.  “This day in history”, from Bond Papers, July 2008:

This was a truly democratic exercise in self-determination in which the fate of the country was placed, not in the hands of a few, but in the hands of the many. The issues were debated and widely discussed. The choices were clear and there were few restrictions on the campaigns. As it turned out, the first referendum showed an over-whelming preference for self-government.

The second referendum decided the form. In the event, voters settled for self-government through Confederation. It has been self-government, that is, government in which the people are responsible for controlling their own affairs, ever since. There are some who find that truth a tad inconvenient, but it remains a fact.

Responsible government returned to Newfoundland and Labrador in 1949 by popular vote. You don't need to argue about what happened after 1949 to celebrate what happened beforehand, culminating in the 1948 referenda.

Too bad Newfoundlanders and Labradorians don't know more about the events.

Even worse that Canadians elsewhere in the country know even less.

-srbp-

Confederation 60: thunder

The accomplished fact of union shook the Newfoundland firmament like a clap of thunder.  From the very first morning that Newfoundlanders became Canadians it could be predicted with increasing certainty that the political weather of the new province was in for a seismic change and that government – the decisive barometer – would now, under the new dispensation, have to be reckoned with in matters great and small, filling more and more of the horizon of everyone, likewise great and small.

Herbert Pottle, Dawn without light, (St. John’s: Breakwater, 1979) p. 13

Whether or not government filled the political horizon as Herb Pottle predicted, Confederation did shake the people and society of Newfoundland and Labrador. 

The reverberations are still being felt.

-srbp-

28 March 2009

Red flags in front of the bull

The Telegram Saturday edition with huge attention paid to the 60th anniversary of Confederation.

1.  Before and after, the front pager which, in the online version includes links to George Baker’s 1970s era vinyl of some bits of the National Convention debates.  Not quite Jim Kirk does Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds but still worth the listen.

2.  A couple of retired reporters talk about covering the National Convention.

3.  A series of columns:

The editorial is worth checking out as well, not for the editorial itself but for the series of pseudonymous comments from someone or several people all of which repeat the same myths Wangersky mentions in his column.  perhaps some people hadn’t read that far when they made comments.

-srbp-

24 March 2009

Encounters with reality

From the 1998 special Confederation anniversary edition of the Journal of Newfoundland and Labrador Studies, some food for thought for the more ardent of the anti-Confederates out there:

1.  For the “whole thing was rigged” faction:  “Confederation, conspiracy and choice: a discussion” by Memorial University historian Jeff Webb.

2.  For the “Canada killed the cod” crowd: “The background to change in the Newfoundland cod fishery at the time of Confederation” by Miriam Wright.  Wright is also the author of a significant book on the industrialization of the fishery. 

-srbp-

12 September 2008

Another bad day on the campaign trail

Federal leader New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton and former provincial party leader Jack Harris have trouble blithely dismissing Ryan Cleary's opinion about New Democrats or about the need to maybe remove Newfoundland and Labrador from "Confederation's death grip". [h/t to nottawa]

Scroll down in the nottawa link and you find another bit of the story as it unfolded, when Cleary scrummed:

the principles of the ND party, NDP, NDP best reflect who I am and what I stand for. I believe that Jack Layton is the best leader in this country to bring us all together. To bring Newfoundland and Labrador into Confederation.

To bring Newfoundland and Labrador into Confederation?

Evidently, Cleary missed at least one little piece of history.

 

-srbp-

23 July 2007

The Confederation referendum and humour

Every now and again you hear someone repeating the line that in 1948, Newfoundland (the "and Labrador" part came later) should have regained independence and only after that looked at the possibility of Confederation.

There were even a bunch of people who tried to stop Confederation through legal manoeuvres.

It's not a new argument, by any means.

In fact, it was such a common argument at the time that The Confederate even took to lampooning it in an editorial cartoon.

Nothing quite hurts in politics like having a joke made at your expense or having your position lampooned.

Just ask Tom Rideout.

Anyway, as a summer treat, here's a vintage cartoon panel from the 1948 referenda on the future of Newfoundland (and Labrador).

It plays on the idea that the real proponents of the independence first argument were Water Street merchants and their associates who had dominated politics in the country. Oddly enough this was the same crowd who surrendered independence in the country by nothing more than a resolution of the legislature in February 1934.

There are proponents of the same anti-Confederate agenda around these days.

Wonder who they might be fronting for?




-srbp-

22 July 2007

Summer fiction

On the day after the last instalment in one of the most popular works of fiction in written times, comes this endorsement of one of the great works of local fiction: the rigged Confederation referendum.

Yep.

It had to be rigged.

After all, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians could never decide the fate of their country on their own. After all, as some of the townies told Lord Amulree, the ordinary Newfoundlander just wasn't fit for democracy.

In his own way, former CBC producer Bob Wakeham turned Telegram columnist repeats the townie nationalist fairy tale that is, after all, the only salve they can apply to their wounds from a half century and more ago.

There's no way they lost the referendum fight because they were politically inept, disorganized and that their fellow countrymen and women had brains enough to think for themselves - no matter how they voted.

Good heavens no.

Democracy? They weren't fit for it.

Why is it that it is only the local nationalists who tell Newfoundlanders how stunned they are? Sure they accuse everyone else of doing it but who was the last person who told you that Newfoundlanders always sign bad deals?

Anyway, here's Wakeham's version of conspiracy:
There’s no doubt that the Brits and the Canucks decided, without consulting the people who just happened to live here, that, by nook or by crook, the "Newfoundland problem," as described by officials in both countries, would be resolved by having Newfoundland become part of Canada; that Confederation was added to the ballot of the first referendum at the insistence of Britain (after all, how could the conspiracy to unite Newfoundland and Canada run its course if Confederation wasn’t a voting option?); and that Canada heavily funded the pro-Confederate, Smallwood side, making the process improper and decidedly unfair.
Confederation was added to the ballot after a popular outpouring of support, not by some underhanded practice. Apparently having choice is a bad thing, if one takes the logical conclusion of Wakeham's comment.

The Confederates raised money on the mainland from many sources, including ex-pats. (Confederation didn't produce outmigration) The Confederates raised cash at home as well

The anti-Confederates had plenty of potential sources of cash on the mainland and elsewhere as well. They just didn't tap into them. They were disorganized, not just badly organized.

And in the end, after all the propaganda and all the argumentation across the country for two years, Newfoundlanders and Labradorians voted.

They voted.

They chose.

They exercised their fundamental democratic right.

In the case of Labradorians, for the first time ever in a Newfoundland vote.

And for some reason, Wakeham and a handful of others others just can't get over it.

-srbp-